Robinson v. State, 812 S.E.2d 232

Background

Robinson, Wise, and Linley agreed to rob victim Timothy Buck; Linley shot and killed Buck on a porch; Linley and Wise later pled guilty and Linley testified against Robinson.
Robinson supplied Linley with a revolver (registered to his father-in-law), participated in returning to the house, and later helped arrange retrieval of the gun from Linley after police located Linley.
Police executed a controlled call and recovery: Robinson used a phone linked to Wise’s mother to arrange pickup; a .38 revolver registered to Robinson’s father‑in‑law was recovered and ballistics matched the bullet.
Robinson initially gave a false name to police, then volunteered to help recover the weapon and participated in the controlled call, which produced inculpatory recorded statements.
Robinson was convicted by a jury of malice murder, two counts of felony murder, attempted armed robbery, possession of a firearm in commission of a felony, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon; post-trial motions were denied and Robinson appealed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence / accomplice corroboration	Linley’s testimony was uncorroborated and therefore insufficient to convict Robinson.	The State argued Linley’s testimony was corroborated by independent evidence tying Robinson to the gun, calls, and presence.	Court held evidence was ample corroboration (controlled call, recovery of revolver, phone records, witnesses) and satisfied Jackson v. Virginia.
Omission of accomplice‑corroboration jury instruction (plain error)	Trial court’s failure to instruct on corroboration was plain error and likely affected outcome.	Court and State argued omission was not reversible error given other correct instructions and overwhelming corroborating evidence.	No plain error: instruction was incomplete but not overtly incorrect, and omission did not likely affect outcome.
Ineffective assistance for not requesting corroboration instruction	Counsel was deficient for not requesting the corroboration charge.	Defense strategy and prevailing case law at trial (Hall) made not requesting the charge reasonable; corroboration existed.	No ineffective assistance: counsel’s choice reasonable under then‑controlling precedent and trial theory; no prejudice shown.
Ineffective assistance for failing to object to testimony about phone-sharing / phone calls	Counsel should have objected to hearsay/lack of foundation about who used the phone.	Counsel elicited testimony undermining that Robinson used the phone; Robinson also had statements admitting he used Wise’s mother’s phone and used the same phone at the controlled call.	No ineffective assistance: objections would be meritless or cumulative; admission and other evidence linked Robinson to the phone and calls; no prejudice.

Key Cases Cited

Huff v. State, 300 Ga. 807, 796 S.E.2d 688 (2017) (slight corroboration of accomplice testimony may suffice; sufficiency for jury).
Parks v. State, 302 Ga. 345, 806 S.E.2d 529 (2017) (corroboration may be circumstantial and need not independently prove guilt).
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence).
Stanbury v. State, 299 Ga. 125, 786 S.E.2d 672 (2016) (addressing single‑witness instruction and corroboration charge error).
State v. Kelly, 290 Ga. 29, 718 S.E.2d 232 (2011) (plain‑error framework explained).
Hall v. State, 241 Ga. 252, 244 S.E.2d 833 (1978) (then‑controlling law that refusal to give accomplice‑corroboration charge is not error if corroboration exists).
Hamm v. State, 294 Ga. 791, 756 S.E.2d 507 (2014) (overruling Hall on accomplice corroboration instruction).
Lyman v. State, 301 Ga. 312, 800 S.E.2d 333 (2017) (no duty for counsel to anticipate changes in law; counsel not ineffective for failing to request charge contrary to prevailing law).
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance: performance and prejudice).
Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365 (1986) (heavy burden on ineffective‑assistance claims).
Faust v. State, 302 Ga. 211, 805 S.E.2d 826 (2017) (no ineffective assistance for failing to make meritless objection).
Marshall v. State, 297 Ga. 445, 774 S.E.2d 675 (2015) (no ineffective assistance where contested hearsay is cumulative of admissible evidence).